We know that the idea of literacy comes from the world of language, Linguistics, Semantics and Poetics. Literacy is usually associated with the capability to read and write but the word is used in many other ways with reference to multiliteracies. Multiliteracy refers to competence across disciplines and multimodality. This connects linguistics with paralinguistics and a mature understanding of Poetics (https://safetyrisk.net/understanding-poetics-and-risk/).

Once we understanding the dimensions of Poetics (not poetry) we see how many aspects of language span all of life, living and being.

When it comes to Safety most think that ‘safety literacy’ is about confirming all the traditional indoctrination of Safety.

The first place to start with assessing safety literacy is to see if the view of safety is anchored to zero. Any focus on zero in safety guarantees that the person is not literate in safety. Zero is the symbol and ideology of being safety illiterate (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/). If you see any organisations fixated on numerics, metrics and counting injury rates, you know they have a low level of safety literacy.

Any orientation toward the perfection of fallible people can only lead to safety systems that brutalise persons.

The beginning of safety literacy is not about measuring knowledge of regulation, standards, systems, injury rates or accident causation. Safety literacy has to start with understanding persons, moral meaning, ethics, culture, understanding human connection and the unconscious. The person who is safety literate understands their role as a: carer, facilitator and helper for others in their challenge to tackle risk.

Just as zero limits safety literacy so too does ignorance about Ethics. Unless one knows how to be oriented towards persons in moral meaning, it doesn’t matter what safety systems you invoke. It also doesn’t matter how much safety data you can regurgitate. Information is not knowing. Regurgitating indoctrination in safety is not learning.

If safety is not enacted ethically it doesn’t matter what you do in the name of safety, it will come undone. Indeed, unless those talking about ‘safety literacy’ also have competence in Ethics, its most likely safety processes will be valued (objects) over the critical characteristics of persons (subjects). Any discussion about ‘safety literacy’ that doesn’t discuss: zero, the nature of power, culture and Ethics, is not talking about safety literacy. We saw this recently with the ASSP spruiking Ethics (https://safetyrisk.net/assp-the-ethics-amateurs/) with no understanding of ethics. Repeating the word ‘professional’ as often as you want doesn’t make an amateur a professional when it comes to Ethics.

If you want to know more about you level of safety literacy and you risk intelligence, you can write to us for a diagnostic assessment: admin@spor.com.au